IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcom/v10y2019i1d10.1038_s41467-019-13067-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental co-benefits and adverse side-effects of alternative power sector decarbonization strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Gunnar Luderer

    (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)
    Technische Universität Berlin)

  • Michaja Pehl

    (Technische Universität Berlin)

  • Anders Arvesen

    (Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU))

  • Thomas Gibon

    (Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)
    Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology (LIST))

  • Benjamin L. Bodirsky

    (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK))

  • Harmen Sytze de Boer

    (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency)

  • Oliver Fricko

    (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA))

  • Mohamad Hejazi

    (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory)

  • Florian Humpenöder

    (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK))

  • Gokul Iyer

    (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory)

  • Silvana Mima

    (Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, INRA, Grenoble INP, GAEL)

  • Ioanna Mouratiadou

    (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)
    Utrecht University)

  • Robert C. Pietzcker

    (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK))

  • Alexander Popp

    (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK))

  • Maarten van den Berg

    (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency)

  • Detlef van Vuuren

    (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency
    Utrecht University)

  • Edgar G. Hertwich

    (Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)
    Yale University)

Abstract

A rapid and deep decarbonization of power supply worldwide is required to limit global warming to well below 2 °C. Beyond greenhouse gas emissions, the power sector is also responsible for numerous other environmental impacts. Here we combine scenarios from integrated assessment models with a forward-looking life-cycle assessment to explore how alternative technology choices in power sector decarbonization pathways compare in terms of non-climate environmental impacts at the system level. While all decarbonization pathways yield major environmental co-benefits, we find that the scale of co-benefits as well as profiles of adverse side-effects depend strongly on technology choice. Mitigation scenarios focusing on wind and solar power are more effective in reducing human health impacts compared to those with low renewable energy, while inducing a more pronounced shift away from fossil and toward mineral resource depletion. Conversely, non-climate ecosystem damages are highly uncertain but tend to increase, chiefly due to land requirements for bioenergy.

Suggested Citation

  • Gunnar Luderer & Michaja Pehl & Anders Arvesen & Thomas Gibon & Benjamin L. Bodirsky & Harmen Sytze de Boer & Oliver Fricko & Mohamad Hejazi & Florian Humpenöder & Gokul Iyer & Silvana Mima & Ioanna M, 2019. "Environmental co-benefits and adverse side-effects of alternative power sector decarbonization strategies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:10:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-019-13067-8
    DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-13067-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-13067-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41467-019-13067-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:10:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-019-13067-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.